krizzx

That's not more than wha tI thought. That is exactly what I thought it was from the beginning.

The RAM had to be dual channel. It would make no sense for it not be giving that it was strictly two chip access and the technoloogy was so cxommon that there would no reason not to implement it effectly making the bandwith much higher than the PS3/360's without getting into th eDRAM at all.

Also, the CPU actually outperforms the PS3/360 CPU's in a lot of areas. Things is, the CPU is so different that no code made for one will work well on the other. You can't put Wii U code on the 360/PS3 and expect optimal reults. Likewise this cannot be done with the last gen consoles to the Wii U.

The problem with ports is that most of them are made with the PS3/360 as the lead platform and those are given the highest budget. The Wii U just gets a cheap port of the PS3/360 game that isn't optimized for it so the ports generally come out playing better on the PS3/360. No dev is going to spend the money to make a ground up version for the Wii U.

The console is significantly more powerful than last gen consoles when all is said and done though.

I'm waiting to see what Project C.A.R.S. has to offer.

Threads like this that ask questions with false pretext should be automatically deleted in my opinion.

How can you answer a question for witch the premise isn't even true?

I've stated this once and I will state it again, if Nintendo last hope was a half-assed port then they would already be dead.

Watchgods will not sell on the Wii U and it is because the effort isn't being put into the Wii U version to make any rational person want to buy it over all of the other versions that will likely have more time and money put into them.

It will be like COD Ghosts, AC4 and Splinter Cell Blacklist. It will have some natural, effortless enhancements over the last gen versions such as better shading effects and higher res textures, but other than that it will be the the worst(glitchy, poor frame rate, etc) do to it being the most cheaply made.

I can not see any reason to promote these terrible third party ports that the Wii U keeps getting, so what would possess someone to think that guaranteed failures like this would be Wii U last hope? Statements like this are ridiculous.

If by some miracle this version does make a profit, all that will do is tell devs that people will buy low quality products on the hardware and give them no reason to change their strategy.

This is something I've always held back, but the recent statement about multi-threaded shadows has really got me wondering.

For those unfamiliar with them http://www.amd.com/u...graphics.aspx#3

Might the Wii U GPU have some components of a dual-graphics engine? It was made during the time where AMD was focusing on them and and some of the stats I've been seeing in games seem unexplainable otherwise.

Its seems that just like ATI's old tessellators, it didn't see much usage do to priority going to Nvidia architecture and designs that were more global. Seems it requires specific programming to properly use.

A console on the other hand is the perfect place for hardware of that nature do to the fact that all consoles of the same name will have the exact same specs.

The Wii U not having specified dev engines was never about power, ever. It was gaming politics.

Most of the companies were EA partners and EA is still bitter at Nintendo. 

Whether or not the Wii U will receive certain game engines is 100% up to the developers.

A lot of people seem to have forgotten that Nintendo opted out of the console war long ago. They keep pitting them against Sony and Microsoft anyway, though,

Nintendo is trying to focus on games and people still want to fight about high/low specs.

Been seeing some pretty productive technical discussion on this forum and I've decided to try my hands with contributing here.